Granheimer, K; Eriksson, P E and Hedgren, E (2025) Innovation outcomes and processes in the planning and design phase of a public infrastructure project. Construction Innovation, 25(7), pp. 1-22. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: This purpose of this study is to explore how the public client, the engineering consultant and the sub-consultant perceive and address innovation outcomes and processes in the planning and design phase of infrastructure projects. Design/methodology/approach: An explorative single-case study of a public infrastructure project was carried out. A multi-dimensional innovation framework, including innovation outcomes and processes, was applied. Findings: Innovation outcomes in terms of products and processes from the engineering consultant's work in the planning and design phase hold untapped potential for enhancing innovation in construction projects. Additionally, findings indicate that sub-consultants from outside the construction industry (i.e. external knowledge resources) play a crucial role in introducing more radical innovations based on adaptation. Originality/value: The findings provide an empirical illustration of a further developed innovation framework that can be used by both scholars and practitioners to analyze and discuss the multi-dimensional concept of innovation in the construction context. Additionally, the findings highlight the importance of capturing perceptions of various actors regarding innovation outcomes and processes to facilitate innovation in an inter-organizational context.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction innovation; engineering consultant; external knowledge resources; innovation as a process; innovation as an outcome; internal knowledge resources |
| Index terms: | infrastructure project, construction industry, public client, sub-consultant, engineering consultant, design phase, adaptation, case study, public infrastructure, construction innovation, construction project, methodology, practitioner |
| Subjects: | sociology, industry analysis, professional, infrastructure and transport systems, data collection methods, building construction, research methods, production management, professional practice, user focus, practitioner |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Design Practice, Engineering Principles, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here